Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ratnesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and specific conditions, including monthly payments to the complainant.

Summary

Ratnesh Kumar, husband of complainant Khushboo Sikha, was charged in a complaint case for alleged dowry harassment and torture under several sections of the B.N.S. and the Dowry Prohibition Act. He denied the allegations and offered to pay Rs.5,000 per month as temporary relief to the complainant. The parties failed to resolve the dispute through mediation. The court, considering the petitioner's undertaking, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions including monthly payments to the complainant and compliance with any matrimonial or maintenance orders. Failure to make two consecutive payments would permit cancellation of the bail bond. The order was made under Section 482 of the B.N.S. and related procedural provisions.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted in a complaint case involving alleged dowry harassment under the B.N.S. and Dowry Prohibition Act
  • Whether the conditions imposed, including monthly monetary relief, are permissible under Section 482 of the B.N.S.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • dowry harassment
  • criminal complaint
  • mediation
  • Section 482
  • temporary relief
  • maintenance

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14380 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2025 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - SHERGHATI
                                                      District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Ratnesh Kumar S/o Anuj Kumar Gupta Resident of Village- Abgailaya, P.S-
                 Rampur Chouram, District- Arwal, at present R/o Thakur Kulhi Dhaiya, P.s.-
                 Dhanbad, Distt.- Dhanbad, Jharkhand

                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Khushboo Sikha D/o Sanjay Kumar Gupta R/o Mohalla - Jagarnath Colony,
                 Gola Bazar Sherghati, P.S.- Sherghati, Distt.- Gaya

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :    Mr.Satish Chandra, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy, APP
                                               Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh, Adv.for OP-2
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   09-07-2026                     Pursuant to order of this Court, the matter was

                   referred to Mediation & Conciliation Centre of Patna High

                   Court, but the dispute between the parties could not be resolved

                   through the process of mediation and as such, mediation failed.

                                2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant /

                   opposite party no. 2.

                                3. The petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no.

                   2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case punishable for the

                   offences under Sections 85, 89, 316(2), 336(3), 351(3), 3(5) of

                   the B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14380 of 2026(4) dt.09-07-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Petitioner is alleged to have committed torture and

          harassment with opposite party no. 2 for dowry.

                       5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner denies the allegation made in the complaint petition

          and submits that he never committed torture to opposite party

          no. 2 or demanded any dowry.                     However, the petitioner

          undertakes to give Rs. 5,000/-per month by way of temporary

          relief/solace, starting from this month, to the opposite party

          no.2.

                       6. In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for

          the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give temporary

          relief/solace of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) per month

          to the opposite party no. 2, in the event of arrest/surrender

          within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above-named

          petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

          each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Sherghati at Gayaji

          in connection with Complaint Case No. 56 of 2025, subject to

          the conditions laid down under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. as

          well as on the following conditions:-

                       “(1) Opposite party no. 2 would file an affidavit
                            before the court below and bring on record her
                            savings       bank      account    number   for   its
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14380 of 2026(4) dt.09-07-2026
                                                       3/3




                                       communication to the petitioner.
                                  (2) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid amount
                                       per month in the savings bank account of the
                                       opposite party no. 2.
                                  (3) In case, the petitioner fails to deposit the
                                       aforesaid amount for two consecutive months,
                                       the court below would be at liberty to cancel
                                       the bail-bond.
                                  (4) The aforementioned payment will be subject to
                                       any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance
                                       or connected proceedings. The present order, in
                                       no way, will preclude the parties to resolve the
                                       issue otherwise.”



                                                    (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.